The idiocy of Tony Abbott

By January 22, 2018Australian Politics, Society

The ever-reliable halfwit, Tony Abbott, has, as is his wont, opened his gob to utter something that is seemingly designed to make Malcolm Turnbull either cringe, or start poking more needles into his Tony Abbott voodoo doll. In support of keeping Australia day as the 26th of January, this prize moron alluded to the ‘what have the Romans done for us’ segment in the ‘Life of Brian’. He said that it’s hard to imagine a better Australia in the absence of western civilisation, as it gave us: “the rule of law, equality of the sexes, scientific curiosity, technological progress, responsible government — plus the constant self-criticism and lust for improvement that makes us so self-conscious of our collective failings towards Aboriginal people — all date from then” and added “We could all make a list of the things that should be better: trust in politicians, economic competitiveness, standards in schools, safety on our streets (especially in Melbourne), congested roads and inefficient public transport, and — yes — the wellbeing of the First Australians, but is anything to be gained by this annual cycle of agonising over the date of our national day?1,2”.

Rarely have I ever seen something written by Abbott which is so demonstrably rubbish; and that is saying much given his propensity for lying or talking nonsense3-9. Firstly, he talks about the rule of law, just as his government is attacking the judiciary, and indulging in money laundering10,11, and race-baiting12, the latter seemingly in contravention of its own Terrorism Act. Secondly, he mentions equality of the sexes, when he belongs to a church that is diametrically opposed to women controlling their fertility, and foams at the mouth when same-sex marriage is even mentioned. Thirdly, he speaks of scientific curiosity, yet doesn’t believe the myriad climatologists who tell him climate change is happening, and seemingly thinks that science is not about curiosity but developing better widgets. Fourthly, he mentions technological progress, when it was he, with Malcolm Turnbull’s help, who crippled the National Broadband Network (NBN) to appease Foxtel, lest it suffer from competition from streaming services. Fifthly, he talks about responsible government, when he lied profusely before the 2013 federal election, and since then, his government has only been responsible to its donors, and is largely unconcerned with the average person.

His list of things that could be better is just as laughable and demonstrates his lack of awareness of anything beyond his own unjustified ego. Firstly, the lack of trust in politicians is precisely because of people like Abbott, who will lie through their teeth to retain power. Secondly, his use of the term economic competitiveness has nothing to do with competition; it is all about giving corporations and the wealthy more money by tax cuts or cuts to workers’ penalty rates, so they can donate more money to the Liberal Party. Thirdly, speaking of standards in schools is hypocritical for a government who initially (while he was PM) cut spending to education, but has, with the passing of the Gonski 2 package by the Turnbull government, reversed it to a large degree13. Fourthly, he refers to safety on the streets and includes ‘especially Melbourne’ in an allusion to Dutton’s race baiting; in fact, the streets of Melbourne are safer than those of Sydney or Brisbane, as crime has been falling in Victoria12. Fifthly, he talks of congested roads and inefficient public transport. It is precisely the lack of public transport which has led to traffic congestion; and the adjective ‘inefficient’ is purely ideological. Abbott is of the neoliberal bent for whom anything done by government is bad and anything by business is good. Lastly, he mentions the wellbeing of the First Australians, which despite the efforts of many governments continues to lag far behind that of white people.

Abbott’s myopia aside, Aboriginal people have suffered horrendously since 1788. At that time it was thought that there were between 750,000 and 1,000,000 occupants of this continent, and subsequently they have suffered epidemics of diseases such as smallpox; hundreds of massacres, many ordered or led by early governors; driven off their lands with concomitant starvation; had the remains of their dead sent to museums across the world; had their children stolen and had those children used as indentured labour, and commonly abused. By 1900, the number of Aboriginals on this continent was estimated to be 93,200; a decrease of at least 88%14. Yeah, January 26, 1788, was so good for Aboriginals.





  • Jon says:

    The conservatives have been running this red herring up the flagpole for years without being brought to book by the media. Little wonder that it stinks so much to any thinking Australian.

    Australia’s progress since COLONisation by the Brits (apt word that, as the indigenous people were constantly shafted and murdered by our “heroic” forefathers) has nothing whatsoever to do with the debate about the appropriateness of 26 Jan as our national day. Obviously that date has a dark side for many aborigines. It also has little meaning at all for millions of immigrants and their descendants. As such it will always attract criticism and be divisive – which is precisely how Abbott and his ilk like it. Indeed conflict is the ONLY way these intellectual minnows can survive.

    This country is very immature in regard to discussion on such issues, and has long been bereft of political leadership across the spectrum – as the marriage issue so clearly demonstrated. Unfortunately nothing will change after the next election, and probably not in my lifetime.

    • admin says:

      Yep. However, I have hope that, now that the trickledown con has been exposed, things may change for the better, if not the best.

      • Jon says:

        No-one in the Federal Labor Party , least not Shorten, inspires as a person of vision with a real feel for the national good. Many Labor members continue to show the same sense of entitlement as the cons and are equally out of touch with reality (who can forget Joel Fitzgibbon’s comment that people on a $250K family income are strugglers. Feeny, Danby…the list of irrelevant tossers is long, although nowhere near that of the cons. Did you read the recent report on pork barrelling of grants? Labor was as bad as the current mob. The cons are a total disgrace but Labor is only marginally better across numerous fronts.

  • Jim says:

    I think it is time that comments on Abbott were given a rest. The guy is a waste of space and not worth worrying about.
    Re Australia Day, as stated previously, I am not all that fussed, but the country as a whole has got much more important things to worry about (cost of living, power and water prices, the state of the roads, the state of public transport, etc). In addition, the indigenous Australians have major problems such as much higher than average levels of domestic violence, the need to improve educational standards, high incarceration rates, grim living conditions in places and general health issues. These are important; the date of Australia Day is a side issue. If it is changed it will make no difference to the problems noted above. As stated by a colleague in the office today, the debate on the date of Australia Day seems to be driven by a small group of trendy latte drinking inner city dwellers whose main interest is in having some sort of politically correct cause they can espouse rather than worry about real issues.

    • admin says:

      I disagree completely. We can actually do more than one thing at a time. I’d guess that your ‘colleague’ is not an aboriginal, and wouldn’t understand how some aboriginals feel about it. Besides, January 26 is not that significant, as you can see in the article ‘Australia Day, 2017’. The RWNJ bullshit epithet ‘political correctness’ is solely designed to be derogatory of empathy, something that is alien to RWNJs. You state that changing Australia Day would not have any effect on the problems you list. You could say the same thing about the apology to the stolen generation. It had no effect on those problems you list, but it was a very important recognition of a past wrong. Some RWNJs would say that it was political correctness gone mad. If that is so, there should be more of it. By the way, I would love to stop writing about the moronic Abbott, but the unfortunate thing is that he keep opening his mouth and speaking abject rubbish.

      • Jim says:

        I think we will need to agree to disagree. Re political correctness, the concept has been around for well over 20 years, well before people such as Abbott used it. One other point is that the Left Wing Politically Correct Green Brigade are just as nutty as the Right Wing nutters. All extremists are bad news. Re Australia Day, (a) the indigenous community is clearly divided on the matter, (b) most of the population are not fussed what date it is held on and many people do not know why it is held on January 26.

        • admin says:

          What is your concept of ‘political correctness’? It strikes me as simply a derogatory term created by the RWNJs to cast aspersions upon anyone they disagree with.

        • Jon says:

          There are fringe dwellers on the left no doubt but in general they aren’t anywhere near as extreme or dangerous as the nut jobs of the extreme right. Not sure why you brought “green” into the mix Jim – any Aussie who isn’t significantly “green” obviously knows or cares little about his/her country and its environment. Forutunately most of us are when you scratch the surface but ignorance is bliss – until pollution and degradation hit you between the eyes and then suddenly everyone affected is “green” and often cranky. Plenty of farmers and businessmen are green because they understand the value of the environment and the cost in not preserving it. Same reason many support action on climate change even though our contribution to the problem and solution is relatively small. “Political correctness” used to have some meaning – it’s now so misused that reference to it usually means the views which will follow will be largely nonsensical right wing, anti-democratic fluff. Same goes for the “social justice warriors” epithet. What sane (and educated) person wouldn’t want social justice? History is littered with the reasons why it is important to the very people who most often use the SJW term – the powerless minnows who feel disenfranchised by government and business.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.